pumprescue:
all radio transmissions are logged in CRIIMSON, I have asked for a log only in the last week and they faxed it to me, had all the times and sitreps, sooo, that says to me that they are indeed logging everything,
Its very workload and personnel dependent.
So they are strongly pushing for the smaller amount of TG's
I fully agree with MFS not having to juggle a whole heap of talkgroups.
As for your point "It probably wasn't that important" in regards to logging, you deserve a slap around the head !!!! I bet the first 10 mins of Ash Wednesday wasn't that important, or Wangary, or the MVA where 3 people died, until the coroners inquest, you can't have been involved in many decent incidents if you sprout forth that woffle, my god man, what are you thinking !! Logging radio transmissions is vital, you or anyone can't tell me otherwise.
When things get hectic and hit the fan there are better things to do than to have operators writing stuff down. Its a matter of priority and utilising the resources properly. I'd rather have someone at a station/base under take actions that aid the response rather then writing stuff down. You could have a full video recording of every person for every second and the outcome of each of those or any incident would be exactly the same. Writing something down doesn't put a fire out! Its for this reason I "sprout forth" as I have actual experience of being involved in real incidents where time matters and the highest priority task comes first. Logging is not the highest priority. You have no idea what you are talking about. Go out and get some real experience. If your not prioritising your doing things in the wrong order.
If your so concerned about having a record why not have a bit of a shot at CFSHQ for not having every GRN talkgroup and every CFS station telephone recorded all the times? But as I said even if all that was recorded the outcome would be same, it would have just cost a whole lot more. I doubt that any coronal findings would even be different, not that it matters as they are after the fact.
really wish people would stop thinking they know , and actually find out, I bother to go and find out, I bother to read memo's from CFS. I still have my opnions on what would be a better option, but we will still be back in the dark ages after I post this, and the way the state's group officers carry on, will most likely be for some time to come.
You mean about how you know that groups with duty officers don't even do 100 calls a year or that I haven't been to MFSHQ for 15 years?
I know what I know. I don't know if I know more than what you know, but I'm fairly confident that my understanding behind the principles are solid. I also know that you don't know how it will be because as I pointed out its not decided yet so its just speculation.
Reading the memos from CFSHQ have less to do with being informed than what you may think. There is more interesting and insightful chat to be had with the people who actually make the decisions. You'll actually find group officers are more progressive than what you think. Its not about change, its about change for the better with the resources available. I'm sure the Group officers would love a fully staffed operations centre to do all the things that you want, but what the state is offering isn't that. I don't understand why your being so aggressive towards group officers and not toward the CFSHQ and government staff. I also don't see why your so negative on duty officers. They are just there to cover till such time that a base or station opens. It also allows crews to stay on one talkgroup rather than changing talkgroups at the most critical time. Your arguments don't make sense. What I can gather is that you are comparing the current system with some fanciful future ideal system. If you compare anything at the moment with the best thing you can dream up its not going to look very good. Were living and working now and therefore groups do what is the best thing for the public now. Once again I think you need to get some experience and focus.
We still can't seem to get over this ownership and power trip, it isn't the Sturt Fire Service, Kyeema Fire Service, Heysen Fire Service, Mt Gambier Fire Service, Lucundale Fire Service etc, IT'S the Country Fire Service, much the same way its the Metropolitan Fire Service. Only when people realise this, might we see some change, and that's obviously going to take another generation. Thankfully some of these old group officers are coming to the end of their time............
Your right off topic and have lost me here. What do power trips have to do with anything? We see change every day. I don't know who these "old" group officers are and I don't see what they are doing is wrong. As I said before, they have more experience than the majority of CFS staff members and thats why things such as changes to communications go to regional group officers meeting for comment. You obviously haven't talked to enough CFS staff to see how out of touch they really are.
I don't know what your problem is so I can help you out. I'm also a bit confused as to why your making such a fuss about a duty officer system that CFSHQ seems to be supporting in the interim to whatever comes next. Make some clear arguments and points rather then hypothetical or rants about the "power trips".
Oh and don't say that groups with duty officers don't tow the CFSHQ line as not only have those groups had it OK with CFSHQ but it is now being promoted by CFSHQ.
RescueHazmat:
When is logging incident occurances not important???..
I didn't say it wasn't important I just said it wasn't THAT important, meaning that there may have been higher priority things to do at the time. As has been pointed out there is a lot of "waffle" not every thing gets logged down on paper. But as I pointed if it was Sturt group it may have been voice recorded.
You claim to be so "experienced" but that was one big Rookie call !!
That or just experienced that some things are more important than other things and logging isn't the highest priority. As I pointed out to PumpRescue logging makes very little difference to the final outcome. You could have every word said by every person logged on a 200 track recorder and it would make next to no difference to the outcome. If you don't think that then you to need to get some experience in real operations. There is no time to go back listening to, or reading pages, of logs for that bit of info you needed. You write down what you need and what you can to get the job done. Rookies get over loaded on info and doing things that don't aid the outcome. It sounds like your one of those.
I will go with the safety of a COMCEN over a duty officer sitting in their Subaru / toyota anytime !! Only so much one person with a couple radios, mobile phone and a pen and pad can do!
If you can give me "reasonable" examples of what a single person in a command car can do versus that of a fully operational comcen, then I will be happy to take your views onboard.
Explain to me why is a comcen any safer? That is why is someone sitting in Adelaide, with all sorts of other things going on, going to make things more safe than an experienced local that knows the location, the crews, the people, and the resources?
Good thing we haven't had one person in a station taking care of jobs for the last ummm well forever. As I pointed out the fact it's being done in a car makes no difference to the service. Its all about function. One person in a car can do as much as one person in a station, but the one person in the car can do it sooner than it takes for the person to get to the station. Oh and I'd put money on the fact that a very experienced officer in a command car can do more than the majority of fire fighters in a station. Also remember that in most cases the duty officer in the command car is only undertaking the function till a station opens up.
Let me say it again as none of you seem to realise stations and bases still exist. The duty officer is covering until such time as a station can open. One person in a command car can do more to assist in the early stages of an incident than a comcen can do. Your not seeing this as your looking at it with a group / single incident perspective. You need to scale it up to state size.
Think one duty officer looking after one group. That is 50 something duty officers state wide looking after 1 service. Think one comcen, 5 people looking after 3 services answering 100's of 000 calls a hours.
The group based system scales up a whole lot better. This is why centralisation cant and wont work unless there is massive resources thrown at it. Centralisation also isn't as robust. The best thing going is what we currently have, one comcen assisting groups/duty officers that help themselves.
I think you need to think a little realistically about this. The "she'll be right" attitude is way too complacent for my liking. I have listened to jobs where Duty Officers have had comms, a handful of requests were made of them and they physically couldnt do it. (2 arms and 1 mouth only go so far!)
And I've heard stations get snowed under. Stations whose operators cant use the station interface (one button press). I've heard Regional HQ's get snowed under. I've even heard state SOCC get snowed under. I don't see your point. I say it again one experienced person in a command car can do as much as one person in a station and that's been quite acceptable for everyone for a long time. I'll also once again say its about prioritising. Everywhere does it, even MFSHQ, being some things take precedence over others. Its unreasonable to think that everything will happen instantly, but not all those things are as time critical as others.
Contacting multiple services for support, maintaining comms and incident awareness, scribing the things such as addresses and locations, incident specifics and everything associated with one, responding and directing other appliances, these things just don't happen when its one person sitting in their 4x4!
Once again your fixated on the fact its done from a car. That fact is its irrelevant to the amount of work that can be done. If you haven't seen DIV commands at large jobs then you don't know what can be done out of a command car.
I'm not saying that one person can do everything. But what I will say is that one duty officer in every group in a command car will be able to do more then 5 MFS officers in Adelaide on a bad day and that sounds like the option your putting forward.
From my point of view both of you are making arguments against something that you don't understand in preference for something that doesn't exist.
PS RescueHazmat, don't forget there's also the delica...
hicks
